I have been looking around for something like checkstyle (Java code
review tool) for ruby. http://checkstyle.sourceforge.net/availablechecks.html
Has anyone here ever come across a similar dilema wherein we need to
enforce the quality of ruby code written in different projects.
What strategy could we adopt?
Plan B would be to maybe use a web based code review tool with manual
reviews, but thats really going back.
I have been looking around for something like checkstyle (Java code
review tool) for ruby. http://checkstyle.sourceforge.net/availablechecks.html
Has anyone here ever come across a similar dilema wherein we need to
enforce the quality of ruby code written in different projects.
What strategy could we adopt?
Plan B would be to maybe use a web based code review tool with manual
reviews, but thats really going back.
I’ve personally found that (as Ryan suggested) the best “review” is a
human reading the code. This is easier in Ruby than in Java, since
there’s considerably less visual noise in a well-written block of
Ruby.
The metric_fu tools do identify several of the remaining issues (code
duplication, excessive cyclomatic complexity,etc) but aren’t really
intended to be used proscriptively (in other words, making a hard rule
“no complexity ratings over 5 EVAR!” will lead to problems) but rather
as a roadmap for detailed human review.
–Matt J.
This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.